(Close Window)
Topic: Cut and Restored Rope for Today's Audiences
Message: Posted by: Richard Fuehrer (Dec 8, 2013 12:44PM)
Over the years there have been many different routines for Cut and Restored Rope.

What do you think is best (or your favorite) for today's more savvy audiences?
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Dec 8, 2013 10:29PM)
Did you do a search in our recently fixed search engine on the Café, this question has been answered in one form or another many times. There is actually only 3 methods to the cut and restored rope trick. All totally fool audiences young and old. Age has nothing to do with it, as classic tricks are considered classic because they are 100% foolers and also entertaining.

To answer your question, the best is the Sterling Short and Long Rope trick. If you want to just do the cut and restored, that will work, but th short and long feature make is funny and more entertaining.
Message: Posted by: Richard Fuehrer (Dec 9, 2013 07:08AM)
Hi Bill,

Sorry for the redundant question. I'm very new to the Café, and not up to speed yet on how to go about things. (I was wondering why it the post got such meager response, but you've given me one reason).

At any rate, thanks so much for sending your reply, and giving me your thoughts on this trick. I was very encouraged by your opinion that the old, standard tricks are still mystifying and entertaining to today's more knowledgeable audiences.

Thanks again,

--Richard
Message: Posted by: Mike Maturen (Dec 9, 2013 07:46AM)
Bill: Is the Sterling effect a marketed effect, or can it be found in one of the books, like the Abbott's Encyclopedia or Tarbell, etc?
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 9, 2013 11:45AM)
I will "differ" with old friend Bill just a wee bit re: Harold's S&L.

I knew Harold back in the '50s. He was an "old pro" in the finest sense of the term. He had a shop (in Detroit), but he also was a perfoming magician on the road. I saw him do a school show, and although it would be a trifle "old fashioned" by today's "standards", it was ENTERTAINING!

Harold never thought of the S&L as a cut/restored. For him, it was a highly entertaining bit of "frustration" business with two boys. At the end of the routine, in order to give it a finish, he restored the rope. --But the restoration was almost a "PS". The Abbott instruction sheet is printed on a sheet of paper about 24" x 24"!!! Harold gives you all the "SCHTICK".--AND, THAT IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT!!!

MIKE::: Fitzkee's book ("ROPE ETERNAL" aka: "The only S I X WAYS TO RESTORE A ROPE" )does an excellent *=(& DETAILED!) analysis of the various technique).

I never liked the Edw. Victor method of switching ends--the dirty work was done after the performer had focussed attention on "THE" spot where the move had to be done. IMHO, bad technique. I finally found in an old Hugards Monthly a "tip" that took off the sting. I'll look it up and give a reference when I get home from the hospital.

For years, I've emphasized this "improvement" in my lectures. (plua several other "clean ups" that make the c/r routine a feature! I'll put them in the book (which is almost finished (Deo Gratias!) I'll include Jack Chanin's timing of the knot steal, his technique for coiling the "cut" piece, and his final ditching of the "knot". Also, I will include the "Convincer Count", (which got me a STANDIING OVATION when I lectured for Frances Marshall's "HARD CORE LECTURE GROUP".)
Message: Posted by: funsway (Dec 9, 2013 12:04PM)
I would suggest that the MagicIan variation of dropping the outside rope end after making the f*k* *o*p really makes a difference.

I would also offer that the approach used in RemCut falls outside of the limits of either the "3" or the "6" methods mentioned above.
Message: Posted by: Mike Maturen (Dec 9, 2013 06:01PM)
DICK:

I'd better be near the top of the list to receive that book, my friend! ;)
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Dec 9, 2013 08:15PM)
Trust me,.......if anyone knows how to ENTERTAIN with a rope....it's Dick Oslund!!!
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 11, 2013 04:17AM)
Rick": Thanks for the compliment! --but, seriously, I'm still learning! (When you're through learning--you're through!)

It all started when Bob Blue loaned me his copy of Ralph Hull's "FIFTEEN MINUTES WITH A PIECE OF ROPE" back in 1946. Then,a few months later, Roy Shrimplin passed along the Joe Ovette "REPEAT KNOTS". So, I "blame" the honorable Mr. Hull and Joe Ovette for my fascination with this ultimately simple prop. --Oh,Gene Gordon must share the blame for introducing me to Bob Carver's brilliant Professor's Nightmare in 1959. Then, Karrell Fox "tweaked" Carver's gem with a Gen Grant concept!

I can't begin to credit ALL of the performers who have shared bits 'n' pieces over the past 65 years, but I must also mention JACK CHANIN.who, in one afternoon, changed my thinking about rope (as a prop).

Rope (the prop) meets ALL of my criteria!
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Dec 11, 2013 08:43AM)
Dick: Are you out of the hospital now? And I still haven't shown you the "Rope Bit" that my first mentor, Gene DeVoe taught me........you'll love it....:)
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 11, 2013 09:18AM)
Arrived home last night, but it will take a bit of time to be 'up to speed'!

Gene DeVoe waa a dear friend. We "worked" a SHOWBOAT together about 25 years ago. Yes! I would appreciate very much your aharing!

O
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Dec 11, 2013 09:22AM)
Welcome home! Glad you're out and doing better........
Message: Posted by: Mike Maturen (Dec 11, 2013 11:02AM)
Glad to hear you are on the mend, Dick...you had us all worried, my friend!
Message: Posted by: Oliver Ross (Dec 11, 2013 04:55PM)
Welcome back Dick !

I'm very happy to read that you're back home and doing better.


Oliver.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 12, 2013 06:15AM)
Good to be "free"! I received very good care in the VA hospital==but "they' sure can't make a good cup of coffee!!!

--and, THANKS to all those who sent cards, letters, and PMs, plus expressed "Get Well or Else" on the Café!
Message: Posted by: ROBERT BLAKE (Dec 13, 2013 02:35AM)
Dick, I wish you a good recovery and a magical x-mas time. I am happy that the experienced wise teacher is back with us.
Message: Posted by: bowers (Dec 15, 2013 12:46AM)
Glad your out.Hope you recover quick my friend.
Todd
Message: Posted by: Pop Haydn (Dec 15, 2013 02:01AM)
So glad you are on the mend for the holidays, Dick!



I highly recommend The Mongolian Pop-Knot:

http://youtu.be/lUMOkWUM7yI
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 15, 2013 07:35AM)
I think that Bob Csrver would be very pleased with the Mongolian Pop-Knot!

Back in '70, Denny Loomis and I developed a routine that started with Ken Allen's "IF YOU LIKE IT" routine and segued (via the Slydini Nightmare Cut) into a PN followed by a bluff restoration (before CONWAY). I used it to open the high school program for about ten years.

It wss very strong, but if I were working today, I would use the MONGOLIAN!!!

Funsway::: When I cut the bight (ED VICTOR)I don't drop the fresh cut end. (I don't like the uneven lengths). Instead, I grab the fresh cut end, and PULL it down until it "meets" the other end.

Also, I use an idea from Leon Maguire in an old Hugard Monthly, before I do the cut. (time misdirection) I'll write it up in "the book".
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Dec 15, 2013 12:52PM)
I think the OP asks an interesting question… he hasn’t just asked what’s your favourite... or what’s the best... he has asked the question in the context of todays audience. In an age where I can be on a bus and watch, on a small portable device, someone cutting and restoring a piece of rope in real time on the other side of the planet it’s hard for me to get into my head that the cutting and restoring of the rope being most interesting part of that scenario. (the most unlikely part of that scenario is me sitting on a bus!)

My point being, and presumably the point the OP was making, cutting a piece of rope in half and putting it back together doesn’t feel like a big deal. I suspect there was a time not too long ago when it did seem like a big deal but it’s hard to imagine it having quite the same impact as it once did.

Of course the entertainment value of watching a good performer live adds, by a long way, the biggest factor to whether any cutting and restoring is appealing and engaging… but performer aside there are lots of methods and variations on how one can go about cutting a piece of rope in half and restoring it… I wonder if there are any methods that now seem less plausible or effective to modern eyes… or is every method still as good as it ever was?
Message: Posted by: MAV (Dec 15, 2013 01:57PM)
In reviewing this thread I felt for sure there would be mention on Daryl's rope routine. I purchased this effect many years ago when the instructions consisted of a large multi-folded sheet of instructions. I tried and tried but never got past the third fold. It wasn't his instruction's fault, totally mine! I set a goal way back then to revisit and learn that routine when I had more time. It has only been about 12 years, Ha!!

Well, times have changed and I see where Daryl gave a three hour lecture on Penquin Magic and it included his rope routine. The cost is $29.95 and I am ready to purchase. Any advice before I ding my credit card???
Message: Posted by: MBrook3902 (Dec 15, 2013 02:16PM)
I 2nd Pop Haydn's Mongolian Pop-knot. It's the only rope routine I've been doing for several years now.
It's funny. Has multiple points of magic. It starts and ends with "one long piece of rope".

Millard Brooks/ Billy Ray the Trailer Trash Magician
Message: Posted by: Mike Maturen (Dec 16, 2013 07:33AM)
I have not performed Pop's routine, but I have it on VHS. I think it is an excellent rotuine and one which I intend to learn and incorporate into my own act.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 24, 2013 04:33PM)
Back in the late 70's I was a semi-pro. I did C&R a couple different ways. Then I got the book, "Hold Out Miracles". That is the cleanest C&R I have EVER seen! No "moves", no special "coiling", none of that. Simple. Show the rope, fold in half, cut. Then immediately throw the cut pieces to an audience member. It instantly is restored!

I adapted a much simpler version using an elastic pull.

Doug
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Dec 26, 2013 04:54PM)
Osland: Been outta touch, didn't know you were out of commission.... [b]Glad to hear you are home and mending.[/b]
Be well, my friend.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 27, 2013 02:43AM)
Hi Pete! The VA hosp. "paroled" me on 10 December after 42 days. (had CELLULITIS). Thanks for the good thoughts!
Message: Posted by: funsway (Dec 27, 2013 05:25AM)
[quote]
On 2013-12-15 08:35, Dick Oslund wrote:
Funsway::: When I cut the bight (ED VICTOR)I don't drop the fresh cut end. (I don't like the uneven lengths). Instead, I grab the fresh cut end, and PULL it down until it "meets" the other end.

[/quote]

to clarify - I meant that the off-end is dropped BEFORE the cut is made - rather than the hand holding two ends and a loop/bight, it hold only one end beneath the thumb and the bight. Now, after the cut there is no end to drop and no un-equal problem. As you take the newly cut ends in hand one can adjust the lengths if desired. However, judicious adjustment of the bight when placing in the hand means the ends will meet with the thumb end is dropped. In most methods the unequal loops would look strange. Here there is only one loop and nothing to compare.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Dec 27, 2013 05:41AM)
By the way - when IN stayed with me a couple of years ago we discussed methods for apparently displaying the two rope segments to be separate after the cut. Many of these are too "positional" to be of general use, but might be appropriate for some of "today's" audiences. The point being that this approach is under-explored/used -- something to consider in looking for the ultimate C/R effect.

To clarify -- the objective is to take the newly cut ends, one in each hand, and separate the segments with an empty space in between. We both agreed that the four methods discussed are best done as a "passing illusion," i.e. with no comment or direct reference, just a casual display to "close the door" on any later reconstruction -- "But, I saw that the two pieces of rope were actually cut ..."
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 27, 2013 10:50AM)
In a very old SPHINX (I think) I found a "convincer count". I did it in a lecture at Magic Inc about 30 years ago for Fran's "Hard Core Lecture Group". The entire group stood up and applauded. I'll write it up in my book. It's really SIMPLE, but it would take a "wall of type" here.
Message: Posted by: inhumaninferno (Jan 8, 2014 05:45PM)
I'll never forget Frank Everhart Sr. telling me that during an appearance at the Chase Park Plaza, he went on, did 20 minutes and never cut the *** rope!

Now, even though we are in the information age, the experience of viewing live magic is just as exciting and valid as ever and far surpasses any virtual experience. Reality wins IMHO.

Historically, magic secrets have often been available wholesale to the public...on cereal boxes, on TV, in magazines, etc. Yet, mystery entertainment prevails. There appears to be a primal need in humans for mystery and the unknown. This is at least partially evidenced by the popularity of Ghost Hunting on TV.
Message: Posted by: inhumaninferno (Jan 8, 2014 05:50PM)
To simply answer the question, best is subjective. Even today, the simplest of C & R rope methods is still effective.

Every era had saavy audiences...yet the classics continue to prevail.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Jan 9, 2014 04:50AM)
Ha! I hadn't heard that story (Frank Everhart)but I can picture him doing it!!!

Yea~ K I S M I F~~~It's the performer, not the prop!!!
Message: Posted by: inhumaninferno (Jan 9, 2014 08:27AM)
Glad you enjoyed, Dick.
Message: Posted by: RajeshLGov (Jan 27, 2014 10:40PM)
I love doing this classic & get very nice reactions from the audience. I use the old coiling method. I follow up the CR with "Rope through neck" with 2 people in the audience assisting me. This is immediately followed with "Flips Rope Routine", sans the lengthening rope. As the audience has already tested the rope so many times, they never doubt a thing. As all the elderly experienced people 've mentioned Ropes always fascinate, even todays SAVVY audience. Best, Raj.
Message: Posted by: JayF (Dec 9, 2014 04:28AM)
I've mentioned this in several other threads. I think Roberto Giobbi's version of the cut-and-restored rope routine is perfect for postmodern audiences. He calls it "The Houdini Rope Trick," and it was published in the November 2009 issue of Genii. I mean, Richard Kaufman wrote that Giobbi's routine "fooled me completely." 'Nuff said.

Jay
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 9, 2014 10:37AM)
HI JayF!

I haven't read Genii since Bill Larsen Jr. told John Todman (another school assembly magician, like the writer--(me)--that he (Bill) didn't consider school assembly magicians were really magicians.

I wrote Bill and told him, I could no longer subscribe as I "wasn't a magician", according to him.

Interestingly enough, his wife's first husband, John Daniels,I think, had done school shows (with her as assistant)!

So, I haven't seen Mr. Giobbi's C&R rope routine. From your description, it appears that Giobbi proves once again, that, it's the performer and his presentation, not the prop. So, I thank you for mentioning it.

Post Posted: Dec 9, 2014 12:35 pm
P.S....

I've written copious notes on the C&R Rope in the book. I mentioned that, earlier in this thread. From the first printed method (Scot's "Discovery of Witchcraft, 500 years ago) until, perhaps 70 years ago, little was written about C&R except method. I think (I could be wrong) that Tarbell was one of the first that published a presentation! (Perhaps Karl Germaine, or Harry Kellar, might have, superceded Doc.)

Ralph W. Hull (remember him? The Ultra Mental Deck--"Invisible Deck" guy.) published "Fifteen Minutes With A Piece Of Rope" in the '40s. I "memorized" it!

Leon MaGuire, in "Hugard's Monthly", mid '40s, followed up with a definite improvement on the Edward Victor method, by "changing the moment". In 1954,Jack Chanin, in one hour, gave me a "million dollar's worth" of tips on the technicals of the basic C&R routine.

Ken Allen's "If You Like It,I'll Do It Again" routine (early '50s) which used a variation of the Karl Germaine method, plus Victor's method, gave me the incentive to produce my C&R combined with the Nightmare, and a bluff restoration (before Conway) that I used for about ten years to open the high school program. It KILLED! --*thanks to all those named above, who had contributed their thinking.)

Looking back, I believe that "my evolution" experience with the C&R rope is what made me really understand that: "It's the performer and his presentation, not the prop!"

So, getting back to the OP's concern: "It's not what you do, it's how you do it" was what my mentors taught me. The "number 3" in the three rules for adding a new trick is, "Figure out how to do it, so that it ENTERTAINS an audience." THAT, is the ultimate objective!

Fool them, without making fools OF them!
Message: Posted by: oso2you (Dec 9, 2014 07:31PM)
I use a classic and simple method for c/r rope. I have always had great reactions when the "knot" uniting the two ropes is slid off and tossed out. For my money this effect will be an audience pleaser forever. Easy to see, easy to understand and surprising.

As an aside, it seems to me that many magicians simply move too fast. They don't give the audience time to see and comprehend what is happening. I think slowing down is especially important with rope magic. What say y'all?
Message: Posted by: 55Hudson (Dec 9, 2014 10:44PM)
"Fool them, without making fools of them!" Well said, Dick. I am looking forward to your book.


Hudson
Message: Posted by: JayF (Dec 10, 2014 12:32AM)
[quote]On Dec 9, 2014, Dick Oslund wrote:
HI JayF!

I haven't read Genii since Bill Larsen Jr. told John Todman (another school assembly magician, like the writer--(me)--that he (Bill) didn't consider school assembly magicians were really magicians.

I wrote Bill and told him, I could no longer subscribe as I "wasn't a magician", according to him.

Interestingly enough, his wife's first husband, John Daniels,I think, had done school shows (with her as assistant)!

So, I haven't seen Mr. Giobbi's C&R rope routine. From your description, it appears that Giobbi proves once again, that, it's the performer and his presentation, not the prop. So, I thank you for mentioning it. [/quote]


Hi Mr. Oslund,

It is an honor to "correspond" with you on here!

Well, I've done school assemblies. Ray Hyman thinks I'm a real magician. Jerry Andrus seemed to think so too when he was still here. Since Richard Kaufman now owns Genii, maybe it is time to re-subscribe?

The Giobbi routine uses a different method than the "typical" C&R rope routine (no sw***h of the middle for a section near the end). The presentation is about how Houdini may have performed the trick. The presentation has kind of a mild "sucker" aspect in that the audience is led to think you may have accomplished the trick using some fancy sleight-of-hand, and then they are shown that you did not use the method they thought (kind of like the silk-to-egg or torn-and-restored napkin).

Since Genii subscribers can access old issues online, I would imagine some compeer should be able to let you see the description of the routine. If not, please PM me. I think you'd appreciate Giobbi's routine.

Best wishes,
Jay
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 10, 2014 08:07PM)
Hi Jay!

Thank you, but, I think the honor is mine!

I know of Ray Hyman, but, we've never met. Jerry Andrus! I met at some convention, and he really fooleld me! About 30 years ago, I was touring Oregon and Wshington, and, was able to spend an entire delightful weekend with him. He definitely "marched to the beat of a different drummer"!

Last night, a friend in the UK PM'd me and sent detailed information of Giobbi's routine. It looks very clever. At this point in my life, I'm not breaking in new material,but, I do enjoy the opportunity to look over the ideas of those magiciand whose knowledge and wisdom I respect. Giobbi is one of them.

Thanks for your input!
Message: Posted by: JayF (Dec 10, 2014 11:40PM)
Hi Mr. Oslund,

When Jerry passed away, I was extremely honored to serve as the MC at the celebration of his life. Jerry was definitely one of the most unique, creative, kind, eccentric, wonderful people I have ever known. I am so lucky that I was able to call him a friend for over a decade.

I still remember the first time I saw Jerry perform. I remember feeling the hairs stand up on the back of my neck because he had fooled me so badly. What he did seemed genuinely impossible. I also remember the first time he invited me to watch him perform from behind so that I could see how he was performing the different sleights. The methods to his magic were a joy to behold.

I'm glad a friend told you the details of the Giobbi routine. Of course, sometimes I think I shouldn't mention the routine to any other magicians. Maybe it would be better for me if it just stayed buried in an old Genii!

Jay
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 11, 2014 12:25PM)
Yup! It has been said, "If you want to establish "credentials" about a routine or trick, hide it in a book!"

Generally speaking, magicians "wont read"! Many great bits of magic are nicely hidden, UNTIL, someone "resurrects" the method, and gives it an entertaining presentation!

Karrell Fox had a neat way of "not telling" them, when they asked where he got a cute bit. He would say, "I got it at Martinka's! (For you young fellows, Martinka's was a magic shop about a hundred years ago!)

I really enjoyed that weekend with Jerry Andrus! He always "thought outside the box"! As my dear friend, Jerry Jay would say, "He was a mentsch, and also a maven!

You are very fortunate to have been his friend for ten years!
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 11, 2014 01:10PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2013, Dougini wrote:
...I got the book, "Hold Out Miracles". That is the cleanest C&R I have EVER seen! No "moves", no special "coiling", none of that. Simple. Show the rope, fold in half, cut. Then immediately throw the cut pieces to an audience member. It instantly is restored!
Doug [/quote]

Nobody commented on this. I've been told, "That's [i]impossible![/i]" Hey, maybe I'm wrong.

Doug
Message: Posted by: JayF (Dec 12, 2014 02:19AM)
[quote]On Dec 11, 2014, Dougini wrote:
[quote]On Dec 24, 2013, Dougini wrote:
...I got the book, "Hold Out Miracles". That is the cleanest C&R I have EVER seen! No "moves", no special "coiling", none of that. Simple. Show the rope, fold in half, cut. Then immediately throw the cut pieces to an audience member. It instantly is restored!
Doug [/quote]

Nobody commented on this. I've been told, "That's [i]impossible![/i]" Hey, maybe I'm wrong.

Doug [/quote]

Or maybe not. I don't have the "Hold Out Miracles" book, and I have not seen that routine. However, what you describe does sound very clean. :-)

I just looked online and I see that there is a DVD by Alan Greenberg on the Hold-Out that includes a cut and restored rope routine. I wonder if it is the same routine as what is in the Mishell book. A pdf of the Mishell book comes with the Greenberg DVD.

Anyway, Doug, thanks for mentioning that routine!

Jay

Jay
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 12, 2014 09:37AM)
My pleasure, Jay! I have fooled magicians with that! I made my own holdout in 1977 and still have it today! I use it mainly for C&R Rope. :)

Doug
Message: Posted by: John Long (Dec 14, 2014 09:43PM)
Doug

Thanks for mentioning that book - I've been considering it for some time.

Yet, isn't the reset an issue?

FWIW: a TT can accomplish essentially the same "look"

John
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 15, 2014 12:39AM)
The late Will Lindhorst, of St. Louis, MO, sold "something" called the "Vanishing Bird Cage" rope trick.

The late Harold Denhard, of Chicago, IL told me that he had done the effect at a magic club meeting, long before the Bill Neff Rope Trick had been sold by Percy Abbott.

I have the mimeographed ad sheet from Lindhorst. Denhard wrote a book, published by Magic Inc. I don't have a copy, but, I think it was calleld, "How To Do Rope Tricks".

The effect is most magical! I tried it out, but decided it was impractical for use in a school assembly program.

I started using the "One Two One" rope trick in 1971 when I produced the "PUZZLING ENVIRONMENT" program for North Dakota State University. Frances Marshall published my program in the "Success Book" series.

Using the "One Two One" principle I could achieve almost the same effect! I still do it occasionally.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 15, 2014 10:37AM)
P.S.
I almost forgot. If I used the "addition" to the basic effect, I could show the "two pieces" separate.
Message: Posted by: inhumaninferno (Dec 17, 2014 11:21PM)
The One Two One dusts off some memories. I think I picked that up at Fabjance Studios way back when...
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 18, 2014 06:32AM)
[quote]On Dec 18, 2014, inhumaninferno wrote:
The One Two One dusts off some memories. I think I picked that up at Fabjance Studios way back when... [/quote]

Yes! It appears to be a "sleeper". It's very good visual effect.

In 1970, I was writing a lecture program on the environment for the State University of North Dakota, and had decided to use magic to illustrate the lecture. Others had used magic tricks before, to illustrate a lecture, but no one (to my knowledge) had ever written up and published a complete script. I roughed out an outline, and had made notes about possible props that might "work".

I conferred with friend Neil Foster at Abbotts. I was planning to make three major points in the lecture to "create an awareness", and "foster a concern" about environmental pollution, and wanted a quick visual prop that would catch student's attention, and, illustrate the three points: Everything is connected to everything else! Everything has to go somewhere! and Everyone can do something!

Neil suggested the One Two One. I had not seen it. He demonstrated it. It was perfect for my needs! I used it, that upcoming season, and, it was so effective, I adapted the effect and lines to fit my basic program. I've used it ever since.

Both the prop itself, and the effect it produces, fit very well into my criteria for performance.

I can use the principle for a visual "transformation", a "production", and a "cut & restoration"! (Not all in the same show.)

Interesting sidebar: Karrell Fox, a couple years later, showed me an "improvement" he (thought that) he had made. I said, "Karrell!, That's in the original instructions on page 2! Bob Cervas suggested it, and Don Tanner, wrote it up!" Karrell didn't want to believe me, until I showed him the printed instructions! (Even members of the Secret Six, can have "disagreements"!!!)
Message: Posted by: Theodore Lawton (Dec 18, 2014 12:53PM)
Okay- I'm a total schnoob, but I perform the one cut method right out of Mark Wilson's CCIM and always get great reactions.

........there is a very real time out here.............


Okay- I've been laughing for the last 10 minutes because the first time I wrote that last sentence it said,"I always get great rections." :eek: :rotf: :banana: :bawl:

I'm only sharing that with you because you're my friends! I trust you all for some reason!


But anyway...

I have lots of things to research here, thanks to you all, but this one really does work. It was one of the first "real" magic ticks I ever learned. I do it every time I visit the children's hospital and at every close up/birthday party gig- with a breakaway wand for kids. Lots of great stuff here.
Message: Posted by: tgold65 (Dec 21, 2014 12:41PM)
I just stumbled on this thread today and am surprised no one mentioned Mac King's Other Rope Trick. This is a do as I do C&R routine where the spectator succeeds in restoring his rope and is shocked when the knot on his rope slides off the rope, just like for the magician. It is truly amazing as you are expecting the spectator to fail, as we have been trained to see that happen by so many bad magicians. But of course, Mac is an amazing pro, and the audience reaction to the spectator rope being restored is priceless.

I have the routine from his lecture notes for a lecture he gave back in the 90's at Estes Park Colorado and thought that it was a treasure that only a few of us would ever get to perform since Mac does not lecture much, if at all. However, now that same routine is immortalized in digital form as part of the Penguin Magic lecture series. I highly recommend it.
Message: Posted by: JayF (Dec 22, 2014 06:16PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2014, tgold65 wrote:
I just stumbled on this thread today and am surprised no one mentioned Mac King's Other Rope Trick. This is a do as I do C&R routine where the spectator succeeds in restoring his rope and is shocked when the knot on his rope slides off the rope, just like for the magician. It is truly amazing as you are expecting the spectator to fail, as we have been trained to see that happen by so many bad magicians. But of course, Mac is an amazing pro, and the audience reaction to the spectator rope being restored is priceless.

I have the routine from his lecture notes for a lecture he gave back in the 90's at Estes Park Colorado and thought that it was a treasure that only a few of us would ever get to perform since Mac does not lecture much, if at all. However, now that same routine is immortalized in digital form as part of the Penguin Magic lecture series. I highly recommend it. [/quote]


I forgot to mention that routine, and I performed it for years! Mac's routine is based upon a routine of Shigeo Takagi's that you can find in the Kaufman book on his magic. I performed the Takagi routine until I discovered Mac's routine.

So, why don't I still perform it? Well, I think it's because I already do two rope routines in most family shows: rainbow ropes and professor's nightmare. I guess I kind of think two rope routines is enough. And, I discovered Roberto Giobbi's cut-and-restored routine and began to perform that in adult shows. So, Mac's routine just kind of disappeared from my repertoire.

I'm really glad you reminded me about this routine. Maybe I'll dust it off again. :-)

Jay
Message: Posted by: TrickyRicky (Jan 25, 2015 06:44AM)
Check out Eric Lewis cut and restored routine. It's in his lecture notes.
Ricky
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Jan 25, 2015 02:15PM)
Hey Ricky...
I gophered for Eric Lewis in the very early '70a when he lectured at Magic Inc. He had some clever stuff, --but, I cannot remember him doing a c&r rope!!! As an old rope cutter (since 1946) I like to be "up" on anything "different". Are his notes available?


Hey Jay F....
I can empathize! I know so many rope bits, but, I am never satisfied! Rope is such a VERSATILE prop! It can be used in production, vanish, transposition, transformation, restoration, penetration, in escapes, juggling, ETC. Packs small and light, mostly angle proof, little if any reset, versatile (any audience) no table needed, visible prop, recognizable prop, visual effects, spot adaptable, ETC. I feel like one of those cardicians!!! (Here's another way to do the four ace trick.!)

About 45 years ago, I got "ruthless". I cut out all but the strongest material. I remembered a remark by Jay Marshall. He said, "Once you have the act set, the next thing to do is start editing.

George Sands was in the same "predicament" at one time. He was lecturing at Abbott's. Greg asked me to gopher for him. He was on for over an hour, and had done some great stuff. He started into the Bachelors Needle Threading. Then, he started on variations! After the third or fourth, I sneaked quietly on the platform and whispered, "George! Great Stuff, but, they're reaching for their wallets to buy notes! QUIT, and get the money! He did, --and he got it!
Message: Posted by: JayF (Jan 25, 2015 04:04PM)
Hi Mr. Oslund,

I think my love of rope magic goes back to when I was a kid and my grandfather taught me how to tie some knots (square, bowline, etc.). Also, my grandfather took me to the very first magic shop I ever visited. One of the three tricks he bought me was "My Favorite Rope Trick," the Professor's Nightmare.

My interest in magic dwindled when I became a teenager. My senior year in college I discovered that one of my dorm mates was a magician. Talking tricks with him is what rekindled my interest. When I first got back into magic, two tricks that I still remembered how to do from when I was a kid were the basic cut-and-restored rope and "My Favorite Rope Trick." I even entertained the idea of putting together an act featuring magic with rope. I was going to call it "It's Knot Possible," or "It's Knot Impossible," or "It's Knot Magic," or something like that.

I never put together that rope act. I do perform at least two rope routines in almost every stand-up show I do. While I do mainly card tricks when I'm strolling, I always have the PN ropes with me as well.

Did I read somewhere that you have a connection to Louisiana? I'm from Louisiana. I was born in Bastrop, and I grew up in West Monroe and Ruston. My master's degree is from the University of Louisiana at Monroe. My parents still live in a tiny town called Monterey in Louisiana.

I'd like to say again what an honor it is to correspond with you via the Café!

Jay
Message: Posted by: bobgill (Feb 16, 2015 10:03AM)
There are many, many C&R-related routines out there.
An event booking agent once asked me why all magicians like doing "that cut rope trick". He saw it as a hack trick, one he associated with kids entertainers.
So any presentation should, I believe, be aware of that sense among some of the spectators.
There are a small number of real working pro routines that have been made available, a rich resource for us.
To quote a cliché, when a working pro releases their real-world material, you should sit up and take notice.
The latest is Cody Fisher's 3 Ropes and 1000 Laughs. Seek it out: the title says it all. Cody has made a lot of his material available and has yet to issue a dud, in my view.
Message: Posted by: JayF (Feb 16, 2015 05:00PM)
[quote]On Feb 16, 2015, bobgill wrote:
There are many, many C&R-related routines out there.
An event booking agent once asked me why all magicians like doing "that cut rope trick". He saw it as a hack trick, one he associated with kids entertainers.
So any presentation should, I believe, be aware of that sense among some of the spectators.
There are a small number of real working pro routines that have been made available, a rich resource for us.
To quote a cliché, when a working pro releases their real-world material, you should sit up and take notice.
The latest is Cody Fisher's 3 Ropes and 1000 Laughs. Seek it out: the title says it all. Cody has made a lot of his material available and has yet to issue a dud, in my view. [/quote]

What you say about the C&R rope routine is one of the reasons why I switched to performing Roberto Giobbi's routine at adult shows. In his patter/presentation, he talks about how the trick is a classic one and offers to teach the audience how Houdini performed the trick. He then goes on to give a pseudo-explanation, and winds up fooling everybody at the end (Richard Kaufman said Giobbi's handling of the trick fooled him). I think Giobbi's presentation changes the "dynamic" of the routine. I doubt anyone would call Giobbi's routine a "hack trick."

I'll definitely check out Cody Fisher's routine. Thanks for mentioning it!

Jay
Message: Posted by: jimgerrish (Feb 17, 2015 06:56AM)
As an alternative to cut and restored rope, consider using wide ribbon or a colorful silk streamer using the Count Artell display moves for flash and pizzazz not found in ropes:

[img]http://magicnook.com/WizJ28/ArtellRibbonCutTY.JPG[/img]

Spellbinder has it as a tribute to Count Artell in his "Silent Lecture" in The Wizards' Journal #28 with some clever new variations and methods for accomplishing it.
Message: Posted by: TrickyRicky (Sep 24, 2015 05:54AM)
Hi there Mr Oslund.
I don't recall getting back to you on the Eric Lewis rope routine.
If you're still having a problem finding it please pm me.
Tricky Ricky
Message: Posted by: jimgerrish (Sep 29, 2015 04:13AM)
The Robert Harbin Cut and Restored Rope allows you to get spectators holding the rope and cutting the rope while you just "apply the magic" to the restoration of the rope. I added some updated technology to his original premise and it allows you to add the "Ghost Rope" moves to his already deceptive handling. You'll find it in The Wizards' Journal #30 if interested.
Message: Posted by: Pop Haydn (Oct 5, 2015 03:32PM)
[youtube]CUUS067m7os[/youtube]
Message: Posted by: TrickyRicky (Oct 20, 2015 05:51AM)
[quote]On Sep 24, 2015, TrickyRicky wrote:
Hi there Mr Oslund.
I don't recall getting back to you on the Eric Lewis rope routine.
If you're still having a problem finding it please pm me.
Tricky Ricky [/quote]
Eric Lewis cut and restored routine appears that you did cut the rope in the middle and that you really have two pieces. The restoration also set everything up for the second cut across two strand which is then restored.
Tricky Ricky
Message: Posted by: Riley (Apr 6, 2016 03:55PM)
No comment on Pop Haydn's routine????????

Well, I think this is a routine for modern day audiences (like everything Whit does)

Funny and entertaining and a joy to watch.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Apr 11, 2016 02:48AM)
Riley!

Yes! I agree.

About 45 years ago, the late Dennis Loomis and I, developed a routine that involved the "ancient" Karl Germaine concept (which evolved from the even more ancient Kellar idea. The late Ken Allen had published a routine in the early 50s that he called, "If you like it", Ken and I were friends. His routine followed quite naturally with the Edward Victor C&R. Denny and I, used Slydini's idea (using the Victor idea to set up for the late Bob Carver's Profesor's Nightmare. Then, we did the Nightmare, and, followed that with a (bluff) restoration of the three Nightmare ropes. This last restoration was before the Conway restoration was published (by Ken Brooke, I think).

I used this in the high school program for about 5 or 6 years, as my opener. It was fast moving, visual, and, it played very well. Both Denny and I used it. We bought rope, a dozen spools at a time!!! (Denny "broke the record" at Abbott's with the largest rope order that they had ever had!)

I have Pop Haydn's "Mongolian Pop Knot" booklet. Pop's Mongolian has some similarities to what Denny and I were doing. (We've never met. He arrived at his excellent routine, independently.) I LIKE IT!!! At my age, and, being retired, I'm not going to perform it. But, I would certainly recommend it to anyone who is interested in an entertaining rope routine!

>>> Of course, "PRESENTATION always beats METHOD"! --and, Pop's presentation is an absolute delight!. <<<

I "go back" to Tarbell's C&R, with the Caesar gimmicks. I was acquainted with Doc Tarbell. I knew Conrad Haden (who made Caesar gimmicks!). I knew George Sands. I've been "doing" rope "stuff" since reading Ralph W. Hull's "Fifteen Minutes With A Piece Of Rope", about 70 years ago. I also recommend my friend Daryl Martinez' "Expert Rope Magic, Made Easy" DVDs, and Abbott's Encyclopedia of Rope Tricks, which was first written by another friend, Stewart James. (I'm not a "First o' May"!)

P.S.! Re: Professor's Nightmare. Another friend, the late Karrell Fox, in his "Clever Like A Fox", page 125, described, IMO, the cleanest set up, and "clean up" for the Nightmare. He showed it to me before the book was published. (We never discussed it, but, I believe he had realized that the move used in Gen Grant's "Perfect C&R Rope", could be used to set up Carver's Nightmare.

Truly! We stand on the shoulders of those great thinkers who came before us!
Message: Posted by: siepielski (Apr 11, 2016 06:14PM)
Pop Haydn's routine is a worker for all audiences.
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 24, 2016 11:26PM)
Dougini
I appreciate your interest in the pull concept for cut and restored rope. This prompts me to ask a question about C and R. Roughly, there are three methods to achieve this effect. I will call the most basic method the end method. The next I will call the add method sometimes using a TT. The third I will call the pull method. There are a variety of ways to achieve each method. The pull method has the advantage that once cut; the halves can be shown to be really far apart indicating the cut was real. The question is this, is one superior to the other? In my mind when a normal person holds up a piece of rope before a number of people and cuts it, that person would feel compelled to hold the pieces apart to show it has been cut. In the first two methods, the performer has a death grip on the two halves ignoring the expectation to show them separate.

I understand there are ways to overcome this. I personally, tie the ends together immediately to avoid that death grip.

A common answer to this question is that the method does not matter. It is the entertainment value that counts.

I remember when I was in grade school and a magician came to class to do magic. I was very excited about it. During the show, everyone loved the guy. However, I was disappointed. I did not think the guy did much magic. I laughed like everyone else and had a good time. But I felt deceived. The guy did not do much magic. And most of it utilized a box or tube of some kind. Does my nine year old opinion count years before I thought of doing magic?

I understand the needs of the pro. He must please the guy that hired him, he must please the audience he stands before, and he must produce to get more gigs. But, is laughter a replacement for that feeling of the magic moment? About that time, our family went to see Blackstone Senior do his full stage act. The cigarette, ball, and card manipulation kept me on the edge of my seat. When he produced a bunny and wrapped it in paper changing the bunny into a box of candy, I felt like I was wasting my time.

This question is asked from the point of view that a goal in magic is to tip the audience’s mind out of whack. After performing one of my coin effects, the helper is locked into motionlessness. The person is so shocked by what they saw, they don’t move. Normally, the person next to the helper takes the props out of the helper’s hands to see the finally.

The pull method has the power to produce that effect.

Thoughts?
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Apr 25, 2016 12:21AM)
I agree about the pull. The original hold out method although wonderful still suffers from the lack of rope separation after the cut. I do remember the first time I saw the Bill Neff Miracle Rope trick... it astounded me and looked as close to real magic as it could get. For a single effect that seems hard to beat from an audience standpoint. On the other hand if we are talking about the true amazement that comes from repetition and conflicting methods, it is hard to deny the power of the Sandsationall rope routine or his other routine, Ropesational by George Sands. It seems that so many other routines such as Fiber Optics and others all owe a huge debt gratitude to these original routines which people don't seem to remember. These weaknesses of not separating the hands are wonderfully managed by the storyline which leads the spectator forward and away from potential methods as well as providing a great amount of pure entertainment and fun.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Apr 25, 2016 04:43AM)
Al -- and -- Ray....

Will Lindhorst St. Louis, MO dealer) sold the "Vanishing Bird Cage Rope Trick" years before Percy sold Bill Neff's C&R. I have Will's MIMEOGRAPHED ad sheet describing it.

The late Harold Denhard (Chicago) wrote a booklet ("How To Do Rope Tricks" -- pub. Magic Inc.) and performed the "Neff" C&R BEFORE Percy sold it.

Incidentally, Dariel Fitzkee wrote "Rope Eternal" (the only SIX ways to C&R a rope. I don't remember the date, but, I can check my copy (in storage).

I published the "Convincer Count" in my book last year. (I "found it" in an old magazine from the '30s (SPHINX, I think)

In "tying" the "cut ends", what knot do you use? The late Dr. Daley "invented" the Daley Knot in the '40s. I've used it since the very early '50s. (One can't join two pieces of rope with an OVERHAND knot.)

The late JACK CHANIN and I had a "session" in '54. He showed me a few "touches" that clean up the handling.

I published all the above in my recent book.

Yes! KELLAR and GERMAINE's C&R principle certainly "improved" Scot's "Discovery of Witchcraft" method! (I've used them) and George Sands, whom I knew, should get the credit as "godfather" of Fiber Optics!

Oh! the late LEON MAGUIRE should not be forgotten either! He "changed the moment" in Edward Victor's method. it's published in Hugard's in the '40s.
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 25, 2016 07:44AM)
Well, thank you for telling us that.
How is the book selling these days?
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Apr 25, 2016 11:57AM)
You're most welcome Al!

Both the book and the DVD are selling well. They are now being read, and, watched on three continents (North & South America, Europe, and Australia. (Oh! and, Minneapolis,too! --hee hee)

BTW...The "One-Two-One" principle, with a slight adaptation, can provide an instant, visible restoration. The two cut pieces can't be shown separately, but, the instant restoration is very strong.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Apr 25, 2016 12:18PM)
Dick, you are a fount of knowledge as always, thanks!
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 25, 2016 01:22PM)
Mr. Oslund
I have had a small booklet out for some time titled simply, "Cut and Restored Rope" by Al Schneider. It is a very basic CR routine intended for professional use. The second restoration is, as you say, instantaneous. I have been using it for about 50 years. How does it differ from "One-Two-One?"
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Apr 25, 2016 05:45PM)
Al...Are you familiar with Gen Grant's "One-Two-One Rope"? If not, PM me.
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 26, 2016 01:17AM)
Found a video of it.

https://youtu.be/Okb9Szy347Y

I have been familiar with it but just did not know its name.

Here is a description of my routine.

http://www.worldmagiccenter.com/MAGIC1/cutrestoredrope/aaab.htm

They are two totally different effects.

You may question the purpose of this little book. It was to be one of many small books presenting the classics of magic.
These are aimed at magicians new to magic. Just basic presentations of classic effects.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Apr 26, 2016 07:47AM)
YUP, That's the one-two-one~! BUT 'ALLA KAZAM" IS NOT THE INVENTOR! IT'S GEN GRANT'S. GRANT BOUGHT THAT OUT ABOUT FIFTY YEARS AGO! I have the original instructions which were provided. There is even a "2" handling included. I used it in 1971 to open my PUZZLING ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM which I presented 335 times in the season of '71/'72 for Dakota Assemblies. Jay Marshall published my complete program in one of the 'SUCCESS" BOOKS. I've been using it since, in my "regular" program. (Gene Gordon published a routine for it, which I believe is reprinted in the "Gene Gordon Legacy" by David Ginn.

I looked at the Amazon ad. It appears that you are using the Bob Ellis' "VISHNU technique" (TARBELL, VOL VI). I remember Jay Marshall adding it to his rope routine back in the early '70s. Vishnu still has the "weakness" of the timing of the necessary move, but the scissors does help somewhat. I, personally prefer Leon Maguire's idea which he published in Hugard's in the mid '40s. (De gustibus non est disputandum!).

The one-two-one basic method can be adapted to a visual flash restoration, which IMHO rivals the "vanishing bird cage C&R rope, sold by Will Lindhorst in the late '30s. I wont go into detail here. Feel free to PM me, if you wish.

Let's not kid ourselves! The PURPOSE of the routine described and SOLD on AMAZON, is to make money!!!
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 26, 2016 10:12AM)
Yes it is the Vishnu move.

"Vishnu still has the "weakness" of the timing of the necessary move"

What are you talking about? The Vishnu move is the superior move to accomplish the cut.
You sound like a beginner worrying about how a move looks.
To my knowledge Karrell Fox used it in every show.
It is an outstanding move.
It is vastly better than flipping a loop up and holding it in a tight fist.
Perhaps the "Leon Maguire's idea" is superior.
But I don't know what that is.
You are always throwing these terms out without any regard to the understanding of the reader.
In other words you are a committed name dropper.
You could give us a clue what you are talking about.
But you go on and on with reference after reference without regard to the understanding of the reader.
OK, you are an old timer that has paid his dues.
GOT IT.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Apr 27, 2016 03:42AM)
[quote]On Apr 25, 2016, Ray Pierce wrote:
These weaknesses of not separating the hands a [/quote]

Various methods of apparently showing the ends to be separate has always fascinated me (both actual and psychological approaches)

When Ian Garrison stayed with me several years ago we discussed and compared these methods and came up with some new "wrinkles."
If there is real interest here, it is perhaps time to write some of them up. Some are method specific, other based on psychological ploys.

There are two more approaches to C&R than the three claimed by Al. One is discussed in my eBook RemCut that I have used about 50 years.
I learned the basic principle in my teens but have enhanced it in several ways -- some because of MagicIan input.

The other is an accidental discovery that I have never seen in print. Neither had Ian. I have never used it enough to justify publishing.

But Al says there are only three methods, so it must be true. ;)

Within that restriction the "disMbody" methodology provides superior handling to all three methods as they can be combined, e.g.
the "ends" can be changed to "pull."

I appreciate the input from both Dick and Al as to experience, but am not limited by either.

It isn't a contest, guys -- just a forum from which we all can learn.

What is important is the theme of this thread -- what will work with today's audience and is it worth the effort?

What I do know is that many methods do not play well on DVD so younger cohorts may never learn them (or desire to.)
Message: Posted by: ROBERT BLAKE (Apr 27, 2016 04:31AM)
What are your thoughts on the Slydini routine?
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 27, 2016 06:49AM)
Funsway
As usual, you claim I said something that I did not.

I said, "Roughly, there are three methods to achieve this effect."

I understand there are more. My goal was to further the discussion of what do audience's like. This was sidetracked. Now you dis me by saying that I think I am the master of all this. Then you play the "I am superior to all" game by saying you have several "advanced" technologies without revealing what they are. Can we see a clip of them so we can join in on the fun? Oh, I forgot, you can't.

Can we continue the discussion without this posturing. I asked the question, what are the pluses and negatives of end, add, and pull techniques.

Can we continue with Mr. Blake's question about the Slydini routine. Can we have a few words of how that is different?
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 27, 2016 07:10AM)
Did some research and found this:

https://youtu.be/srG2XoHqobk

It seems to me he is using the add style.

Then there are those that favor cutting the rope into three pieces enabling the use of the three count such as the Mongolian bit.

This brings be back to my question. Which has more impact end, add, pull, whatever and is it worth the effort to use the pull method. Then it depends on the trouble you are willing to go through. Karrell Fox mentioned he finally got his act to fit into a cigar box except for his bang gun. Then, to the extreme, Del Ray did not fly to gigs so he could take some very large props for his close up act. Thoughts?
Message: Posted by: funsway (Apr 27, 2016 08:50AM)
[quote]On Apr 27, 2016, Al Schneider wrote:
Funsway
As usual, you claim I said something that I did not. [/quote]

You seem to resemble that remark. Everyone knows I was joking because of the Smiley Wink.
If you feel "dissed" it doesn't mean that I "dissed" you. That is projection.

It did seem curious that you limited the options to three and then discounted the first two to support your favorite -- possibly to support sales of your mentioned book.
Because of your reputation and pedantic style some newcomers might infer there are no other options to consider, roughly speaking.

The majority of my post was about the concepts of "ends apart" and "support of the pull method."

Yes, I feel they are "improvements" but not necessarily "better than" for everyone.
In fact, I recommend that everyone get your book first, and mine only later if they have learned the basics.

My eBooks have been available for years (NeckLacy and Remcut)." I purchase your books ... ;) again

The real issue is how well any C&R effect plays today -- method employed a distant third for me. Second most important? Appropriate to the setting and other effects in the routine

I agree with your earlier assessment, Al, that a "normal" person might show the pieces separate after a cut,
but how many people today have ever actually ever cut a rope at all? or know what a clothesline is?

Last time I did the "Shoelace Knot" a kid asked his mom what a shoelace was.

I did a C&R with a metal chain with medallion using wire cutters that went over well -- broken links flying all around,
but not sure if they liked the magic of the restoration, the uniqueness of the materials or the violence.

Note: I cut the chain, removed the medallion for some "single coin" effects, placed it back on the chain to be restored and handed it out;
thus, the restore was non-sequential to the cut and my hands free in between. I felt this combination enhanced the magical impact (Virtual?)

Not implying any superiority here -- just attempting to fuel discussion on alternative methods and props.
I will never be half the magician you are, Al, but can be creative.
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (Apr 28, 2016 09:51AM)
The subject of the effectiveness and magical strengths of the basic methods; (end, add and pull) is an interesting one. I think I'd also include 'magnets' and 'hide' as two aldditional basic methods. Magnets I think is self explanatory and 'hide', would be where you actually do cut the rope in two, at or about the middle, and in the restore the centriazed cut is simply held and hidden.

While it seems natural to assume that being able to hold the two pieces apart from each other after a single piece has been cut would be a magically strengthening factor I'm not sure that one can make that conclusion.... Despite how appealing and straightforward that sounds. I think the structure of a routine has more to do with the magic robustness and strength of the effect than any individual elelments.

For instance take a routine using the end method where the script emphasises the importance of producing two equal lengths of rope from the cut... In such a presentation it seems to make more sense to keep the cut ropes in one hand, next to each other, in order to make such a comparison easier.

I think this example nicely illustrates that the effectiveness of being able to hold the ropes in separate hands is only more effective if there's cause for suspicion that things weren't handled naturally, or to put it another way, that they weren't handled in a way that one would naturally expect them to be handled.

This gives rise to the question... 'So... what is the way that one would naturally expect things to be handled?'

Cutting a piece of rope or string into two is something that people will be familiar with but it will also be something that isn't part of most people's everyday experiences. So what consititutes natural handling and what doesn't might not be something readily distinguishable.

It seems like common sense though that the actions that show the ropes separately ought to be more robust than those that don't...But magic isn't just about doing things and the actions we make..... It's about more than that.... It's about stories and narrative and scripting.

So if separating the ropes slowed down a routine that might actually in turn make the magic less entertaining. And the entertainment factor can add hugely to the effectiveness of the method. When people are engaged in the concept of what's being presented as happening, rather than being engaged with trying to work out what is actually physically going on (and I believe the former is more likely when an audience is being entertained) the entertainment factor can be thought of as helping hide the method. It draws the audiences' focus away from the 'how'. The 'how' might get dealt with, maybe, later but by then their own memories start to fool them possibly as much, or even to a greater degree, than any of the magicians actual methods.

So I think that in assessing the strength of any cut and restored routine one has to look at the whole picture of what's being presented.

One also has to bare in mind that an audience hasn't got anything against which to immediately compare what they are seeing. So while within a given presentation the 'end' method might be seen as being weaker than the 'pull' method both might be equally effective for an audience that isn't in a position to compare one method with another.

The last rope routine I worked on combined multiple methods. Such an approach can add yet more layers of robustness.

Ultimately I'd have to say there's no definitive answer that determines that, this method is more effective than that method.... I think one has to look at each routine on it's merits and determine if there's a better method for what is being achieved within the context of the routine. And if, say, there are definite benefits from using, say, the pull method over something else, one also has to determine whether the extra work entailed warrants the end result?

That of course will be down to the criteria an individual lays down for themselves. :hrmph:
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 28, 2016 06:26PM)
Sealegs
I appreciate your comments. The methods of achieving the restoring can be expanded. What about cutting a rope in half, putting in into a change bag, and pulling it out restored. I am not in favor of that but there are those that get 10 minutes out of it. While I also celebrate the pull method my intention on asking the question was to elaborate on some problems with it. For example, Dougini throws it to the audience to restore it. Karrell Fox would toss the rope into the air and catch it restored. I think that this can possibly obscure the magic. I visualize a system in which the method is done slowly in the hands. I believe it can appear a rope is cut in two, shown separate, and the ends apparently touched together and the rope is whole. Then, as you have pointed out, how much trouble does one go through to accomplish the magic weighed against the effect on the audience.

I think a significant advancement in rope routines is the Mongolian routine. With two cuts, the ropes can be shown to be separate without any other hardware. The real pro might say, "Well you need new rope after each performance, that is not professional." Then, is it not professional to try and do the best magic possible for your audiences? Some say no, just get them laughing and loving you. The magic does not really matter.

In wrestling with these problems, I came up with "Fusion." In this routine the rope is already cut. Four pieces of rope are shown separate. They are held in one hand and instantly change to a single solid piece of rope that can be examined. This is an additional method. It can be reset. Nothing is damaged in the routine. The pro might say, that is not good enough, I want it reset immediately.

Here is another question. Often the wizards of wisdom scream, it doesn't matter how you do it, it is the ENTERTAINMENT that counts. What say you? Is the method worth creating a magic event or is entertainment the driving force. In my opinion, you can forget about entertainment and focus on magic effect. A good magic method presented with clarity and well mannered behavior will tip an audience brain out of position. They won't care about entertainment. They will want to see more.

I have wrestled with these questions for 50 years. I am not suggesting a solution. The Mongolian concept is a significant advancement. But it is a significant advancement in method not necessarily entertainment value. That depends on the operator. Presented by a competent worker that shines his shoes, it will go over very well.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Apr 29, 2016 12:53PM)
Al, I always love your thoughtful thinking ( is that redundant?). I think even tackling the subject of what is the best of anything is an exercise in futility. As an example, a carpenter would never think of entering a discussion of what is the best saw. These are simply tools and there are many of them for many different and very specific tasks. Yes, if you were to reduce it to a very specific type of saw we might debate the relative merits of quality of steel and sharpness. In that way, I have very specific favorites when it comes to a specific move or technique for cutting a rope to get to a specific position. I have my personal favorites when it comes to different types of restorations of the same form. On the other hand, to question a macro effect under the term "cut and restored rope" is contingent upon so many personal requirements and what personal entertainment value you can bring to each option. I have honed and developed my personal favorites over these 50 years and even though I constantly seek new options, unless they can transcend an existing method, I will keep doing my best to polish and perfect the ones I already use.
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 29, 2016 02:43PM)
Ray Pierce
It is strange you use carpenters and saws for an analogy to the task at hand. I was a carpenter summers when I went to school. Actually there were many discussions about saw technology. I remember many times standing on the deck of a new house this subject came up. Of particular interest was the guards used on saws. Many carpenters thought a guard on a saw was more dangerous than a saw without a guard. One guard was of circular type. A lot of carpenters put a wedge in it to disarm the thing. Often during the use of the saw, one had to hold the guard with one hand while the other hand held the saw. That hindered the use of the saw. Some guards flipped back while the saw cut the wood. That appeared to be a handle one could hold the saw to guide it. If you wrapped your fingers around the guard in the process and the blade hit a knot, the saw could kick back and cut four fingers off. Perhaps you should rewrite your post with a different analogy.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Apr 29, 2016 03:12PM)
Al, I have tried many times to actually start a discussion on the Café. It is impossible, and have given up that the café can be a discussion group and forum. It is just to much of an opinion forum, as I can only assume that there are very few that have actually went past leaning one method for a trick, or opened the package and put thought that is to easy, and put it in a drawer, without even reading the paragraph of the instructions.

Although, Al, you need to open up and see their side of a post, and at least acknowledge their viewpoint. One can find exceptions to everything or even make up an exception to just they are right. I would suggest you not fall for this, it is repent all over the Internet and the news. Taking any little thing totally unrelated, and make it sound like the truth.

It is all about buying the latest new magic trick, in this generation, they don't want old anything, they would rather buy the old method in a new package, and pay $200 for it, then to read it out of book for $25.

I can't comment of the Vishnu Rope trick, because I never read it, I only have the 1st 5 Volumes of Tarbell.

I have heard there were other forums that tried discussion topic, and deleted comments not on topic. The people that were deleted got angry and not long after the forums shut down. People have no control on the Internet, and just want to cause trouble and destroy everything.

Just my thoughts as I read these this topic getting out of hand.
Message: Posted by: funsway (Apr 29, 2016 03:35PM)
I spent a fair amount of time as kid watching houses being built. Back then floors were built with criss-cross boards and not plywood -- laid down and cut off by hand.
Power saws were hardly used at all. Many of the carpenters had a favorite saw, but one older guy was special.

He carried a cross-cut saw in a sheath on his back and no one else ever thought of touching it. When it came to framing his skills really came though - especially fire-breaks.

He would stand back and eye a space between uprights, then pick up a scrap 2X4 and hold against his knee. Out came the saw and with a single stroke he would cut it to length.

No measuring or marking. Then he would toss it to another carpenter to nail in place. Actually, he could keep three other guys busy. Maybe he saved them from cutting off fingers.

It was very magical to me. He made something possible that I didn't even know was impossible.

Most anyone can cut a board, just as anyone can do a magic trick. Most people never took the time to watch the show. I later learned that this crew did nothing but floors and walls,
and that each carpenter had a magical specialty. I also learned that more magic can happen when watching than talking.

....

Al's story makes me think of the magicians who do not follow the instructions provided by the creator -- looking for an easier way, or just not caring for the reasoning behind the design.
When an effect fails to produce the desired response they blame the trick or props or creator.

I often use a knife instead of scissors for C&R. The audience seems fascinated by the flashing blade -- possibly hoping I will cut off a couple fingers by mistake.
The return of the knife to sheath on my belt also provides a cover for steals and ditches. Never thought of using a saw ;)
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 29, 2016 04:20PM)
Bill Hegbli
I am well aware of which you speak.
You are a fool if you think I am not.
I have talked to several good people that have attempted to bring sense to this forum.
They have walked away because it is not worth it.
Because of that, the fools remain in control.
However, there are those silent readers that value some of what they read.
When I have expressed the idea of not contributing, some have said that they value what I have offered and want more.
I view the forum as a microcosm of life.
I find the microcosm interesting to practice the game called life.
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Apr 29, 2016 05:09PM)
Al, okay, it was puzzling because you responded to the fools, and I did not know if you had realized their game as of yet.
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 29, 2016 06:49PM)
Bill
Your post makes my day.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Apr 29, 2016 10:48PM)
[quote]On Apr 29, 2016, Al Schneider wrote:
Perhaps you should rewrite your post with a different analogy. [/quote]

I have been a carpenter for years as well building all of my sets and illusions for the past few decades. Yes, the guards on table saws are very frustrating in spite of the fact that a kick back messed up my left finger to a fair degree as I was building some huge cases for one of David C's Illusions years ago. Live and learn! I think your post was exactly my point. It is not possible to say that one saw type is "best". It depends on your use and application. Even the lowly cross cut saw has it's time of need. They are all necessary tools that contribute to building something great. All should be considered and have ready for the right application. Rope cut methods are the same. Then again, I teach something called dynamic creativity which utilizes a fresh approach to each problem and not relying solely on past techniques or methodology. We tend to stagnate when we use the same creative pathway to a solution time after time. But that's just me :-)
Message: Posted by: Al Schneider (Apr 29, 2016 11:18PM)
Often creativity requires knowing that which has gone before to know when a new path is established.

My effort in this thread has been to list the present technologies.

And also describe the subtleties associated with each.

Then, one can consider new paths.

I was attempting to get the readers to do that.

Unfortunately the fools get in the way of this path.

I am a person of intuition not logic.

This means I will often not follow a path of logic.

Intuition is a fusion of things known to things not known.

True intuition is a fusion of things not known to more things not known.

Then the path of creating complexity that leads to order that again leads to complexity and on and on unfolds.

Then things that never existed come into reality.

This is my life.

I am often shunned.

But I can make a better C&R
Message: Posted by: funsway (Apr 30, 2016 04:47AM)
It is interesting, Al, that you consider anyone getting in the way of "my effort" to be disrespected. Your way or the highway, right?

Now you would label anyone "a fool" if they point out your view of reality (this path) is incomplete as to "present technologies." Others also can "make a better C&R"

Considering "paths" others than chosen by you as important are not "new paths."

It seems that your, "knowing that which has come before" is for others than yourself. Perhaps your genius should allow for a different set of rules --
but that does not justify a lack of respect for other's ideas, or any thought another is posting for any reason other than to inform and enhance magic as an art.

You feel you are "shunned." That doesn't mean that others have shunned you, however.
Maybe it is not your "way of thinking/creating" that is the problem, but the way that you choose to treat others that is "less than respectful."

I value your opinions, Al, but they are just opinions. As one older than yourself, I foolishly suggest "toss a little class into your act."
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 1, 2016 06:54AM)
Thank you, Ken!

You saved me a lot of time with your remarks above to MISTER Schneider.

BTW: Bob Ellis was no fool! (nor Jay Marshall, either!) Bob's VISHNU cut is not intrinsically wrong, (here comes the "but": But, IMHO, Leon Maguire's is simpler, because Leon "changes the moment". As Jay would say, "It's a matter of personal taste, and, small consequence."

When I showed the "convincer count" to Fran Marshall's "hard shell" lecture group in Chicago, 20 years ago, they STOOD UP AND APPLAUDED. I'm certainly not a genius. I found the count in an old magazine (Genii? Sphinx? --1930s)

I've been doing a C&R rope (various methods/routines) since 1946. I've even written a book on knot tying for the Boy Scouts!

Denny Loomis and I "invented" a routine somewhat similar to Pop Haydn's Mongolian, in the late '60s. We used the Germaine idea, Ken Allen's "I'll do it again" routine,and, Slydini's cut which produced the Nightmare lengths. It "finished" with a "bluff" restoration, BEFORE, the CONWAY, was published. We both used it for about 5 years. My presentation of it "fit" my HIGH SCHOOL program, and, it played STRONG!

I've read through Pop's routine. He arrived at his, independently. --We've never met. Frankly, I LIKE HIS, BETTER THAN DENNY'S AND MINE!

I wrote up my notes on C&R rope in the book, with full credit to Jack CHANIN, and Dr. Daley. I never met Dr.Daley. Keith Lingley showed me Doc's knot in '52. Jack shared a "million $'s worth of presentation concepts in two hours. (He was not only a maven! He was also a mentsch!)
Message: Posted by: Sealegs (May 1, 2016 07:07AM)
Al wrote:

"The real pro might say, "Well you need new rope after each performance, that is not professional."

" The pro might say, that is not good enough, I want it reset immediately."

I guess it's possible for anyone to say anything but my experience of pro acts is they are interested in obtaining the maximum effect from the magic they present and preparation and reset times are way down the list of negative aspects of reasons for not adopting any possible method. (I'm thinking here in terms of cabaret and stage performances... I guess close up performers might think differently but I don't know any close up magicians that perform a cut and restored rope as part of their repertoire) The inconvenience that a particular hook-up may have on, say, one's costume or how it might affect other aspects of a performance is more likely, in my experience, to be the thing that puts a performer off adopting a "better' method.

Al also wrote:

" Here is another question. Often the wizards of wisdom scream, it doesn't matter how you do it, it is the ENTERTAINMENT that counts."

" In my opinion, you can forget about entertainment and focus on magic effect. A good magic method presented with clarity and well mannered behavior will tip an audience brain out of position. They won't care about entertainment. They will want to see more."

" What say you?"

Regarding the two positions, ... 'it doesn't matter how you do it it's the entertainment that counts'.... and ... 'entertainment doesn't matter it's the method and clarity of a well mannered presentation that counts' .... I would say I that I think it 's unlikely that I would want to watch anything from any performers that held either of these two views of performing magic. The latter sounds dull for its lack of entertainment and the former sounds dull from its shallow and hollow basis.

In my opinion this magic vs entertainment is a largely false premise to start with. I don't see these two aspects of a magic performance as being the antithesis of each other. Of course both positions can be taken to the extreme and in this case they look like they are opposites... but between these extremes I believe they can act to compliment and enhance each other. Indeed I would say part of the skill of a good magician is, as a performer, finding the sweet spot where there is both a;... maximum enhancement of the entertainment from the robustness of the method... and;... a maximum enhancement of the magic from the context within which it is presented. This will of course be different for different performers' personalities and stage personas.

If an attitude of, "well it's entertaining the way I'm doing it" is used as an excuse for not using a ;'better' method then the magician could be thought of as short changing themselves and their audience. Equally if a method is adopted purely for it's robustness without consideration for how it impacts the way it's presented (and maybe the way other routines are, as a consequence, presented), then the magician could also be thought of as short changing themselves and their audience.

Some of what should have been the strongest magic I've seen, hasn't been because I felt I was having to endure it and suffer it because the performer failed to entertain and engage me while they were presenting it. I have also seen, what should have been some great magic, ruined by performers' desperate attempts to 'add entertainment' into their performance.

But maybe these are just the views of a fool?
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 1, 2016 07:39AM)
Hello Neal!

I like your thinking!

Dr. A.M. Wilson (editor of the early "SPHINX") had a "wise saying" in the masthead of his "op/ed" page: "MAGIC IS AN ART THAT SOMETIMES INSTRUCTS, OFTEN AMUSES, BUT, ALWAYS ENTERTAINS."

I read that, when I was 14 (70 years ago) and I BELIEVED the good doctor! After several years of reading books like Maskelynne & Devant's "Our Magic", and Fitzkee's trilogy, and when I had a bit of performing experience, I realized that he was mistaken! MAGIC IS NOT INHERENTLY ENTERTAINING!

We magicians can make magic entertaining, if we use good presentation! Certainly our technical skills must be "up to par"!

When I stepped in front of 1500 high school students, with only a length of rope and a pair of scissors, I had to not only entertain them, but, also fool them! --Without making fools OF THEM!

I had my share of encores and standing ovations! (Otherwise, I wouldn't have had repeat engagements!)
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (May 2, 2016 04:51AM)
A rope effect is the first real magic trick I learned in '66 and it is still a feature in my show. I have created new and original methodology as well as using George Sands Sandsational Rope as well. Yes, It has been a fulfilling journey leveraging my original routine as well as my new "Long Rope Cut" I have used in 7 different countries around the globe. My 3 rope routine was a key training tool for all of the magicians at Caesars Magical Empire when I was the Magic Director for that project. It was an object lesson in misdirection and so many basic magical skills. I'm so happy that rope magic will always hold a very special place in magical history.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 3, 2016 09:37AM)
YUP Ray!

A "hunk" of rope is a most PRACTICAL PROP! Next to a pack of Bikes, it has almost ultimate potential!

Rope EFFECTS are VISUAL, the PROP is VISIBLE, RECOGNIZABLE and PACKS SMALL & LIGHT. (In your pocket!) Rope EFFECTS are generally VERSATILE (play for almost any audience)and ANGLE PROOF, NEED NO TABLE, and, are SPOT ADAPTABLE (opener, middle, or closer!) Further many rope EFFECTS require little or no set up! PLUS!!! ROPE TRICKS ARE USUALLY WINDPROOF! (If you've ever worked a state fair grandstand show, you KNOW!

We owe a lot to those old timers, like G.W. Hunter, Ralph W. Hull, Harry Kellar, Karl Germaine, Harlan Tarbell, Milbourne Christopher Leon MaGuire, Edward Victor, Bob Ellis, George Sands, Bob Carver, Harold Denhard, ET AL! (I KNOW I've left someone "out"!!!) Oh yeah! Stewart James (SEFALALJIA) AND __________________(other(s) whom you may know of!) --OOOOPS! another Charlie Miller! --I used a preposition to end a sentence WITH!
Message: Posted by: Josh Riel (May 13, 2016 07:47PM)
So, as a nobody who is noted for little more than people I've irritated, I'd like to go back to the OP.

Not minimizing the saber rattling and jocular Crowscockery of the last few pages...

[quote]What do you think is best (or your favorite) for today's more savvy audiences? [/quote]

[b]The same as were for yesterday's audience: [i]The ones that are good![/b][/i]
I don't need to say anything else, yet I will.

I'm cool like that.



I like Pop's "Mongolian Pop Knot" and Michael Finney's "Lady Rope Routine"
However, I like Michael Finney, he's a good magician, his magic is good because of that, not because of his groundbreaking "new" pair of trick scissors or gadget or never before heard of cut.
Pop, whom my wife and I had the extremely wonderful pleasure of watching his close up at the Magic Castle, and his stand up at the Magic Monday in Santa Monica this last weekend... Well Pop Haydn makes magic [i]good magic[/i] simply by performing it.

I am in no position to tell you if the Mongolian Pop Knot is groundbreaking, as I am not a magical historian. But as a Person who LOVES magic, I would put his routine, his presentation against any other out there.

What makes magic good anyway? Not to a magician, we are too often the worse people to ask about good magic, per capita. (Now about the newest trick you can buy under $20...)
Have you ever tried to WOW your audience by telling them "Enter noted magician to other magicians" thought this next trick was good?
Would they be standing in ovation to your legitimate claims that no magician ever knew about the new principle you are using until recently when you bought it?
Would they tell their grandkids about the performer who did the tricks that JUST CAME OUT on Amazon and Penguin?

Were you aware that cutting a rope in half, tying it into a knot and slipping the knot off the end will blow a LOT of peoples minds if you are completely silent? Actually I've seen it ruined a lot of times by the *** magicians "patter".

Now, it's been a while since I've posted here, but I am going to be a mentalist here and predict that less than 10% of what I wrote was even read by any one person, and that I'm one of 5% of people who even reads anything here that read all the posts.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 13, 2016 07:58PM)
I've read this entire thread. I started with the "original OP", and, even made several comments.

"...Enter noted magician to other magicians..." left me wondering what you were trying to say.
Message: Posted by: Josh Riel (May 13, 2016 08:19PM)
See, you had to enter a noted magician to other magicians.


For instance: If I was a noted magician to other magicians you would have entered me.
I wouldn't have allowed it.
Message: Posted by: Josh Riel (May 13, 2016 08:23PM)
In the industry we call that a double entendre.

Seriously though, I'm married, and that still would make my prediction not untrue, as one other reader does not constitute the >%5
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 14, 2016 11:35AM)
I DO read the posts regarding a trick that I do or am interested in! :(Ha! another Charlie Miller! --I used a preposition to end that sentence WITH!

Sorry Josh! Your "explanation" of that phrase, is totally incomprehensible. --At least to my old ears

Your opening remark did catch my attention. Your second "non sentence" didn't really "go anywhere"

I'm a bit too old to be "cool". I would like to understand what you are saying.

I've met Michael Finney, and I like his C&R rope routine, even though he uses the Victor trip loop method, which is inherently "marred", technically, by bad timing, in doing the trip loop. His PRESENTATION minimizes the move, IMO, and lay people seem to ignore it. He works to a different audience than I do. I couldn't do what he does, for my audiences.

I've never met Pop Haydn. I do have his hand written 4 ring routine that the late Hersy Basham gave me, years ago. Hersy said that Whit (then) had worked it out in Hersy''s living room.

The late Dennis Loomis and I had worked out a rope routine, which was greatly similar to Pop's "Mongolian", that we both used for about 5 or 6 SEASONS. I have no way of knowing (and, don't care!) if our routine preceded Pop's! I do know that Denny "broke the record" at Abbott's for the largest order for spools of rope, EVER. --i wasn't far behind!

I dropped the routine, when I finally developed a routine for the Nightmare that pleased me. A friend sent me Pop's booklet on the Mongolian. I LIKE POP'S BETTER THAN WHAT DENNY AND I HAD DEVELOPED. Pop is a "living example" of the old "proverb" >>>"It aint WHAT ya do, it's HOW ya do it"! <<<

Your next long paragraph is incomprehensible to me. --and, I am a fairly good writer, and reader!

I would like to emphasize that IMO, "...sliding the knot off the end..." is not a good way to restore the rope, (Even though many do that, including my good friend, Mac King. The late Jack Chanin (and, the late Pat Page) both had much better finishes, which we discussed many years ago.

So, your attempt to be a mentalist, is, I'm afraid, a failure! I'm only one person, BUT I read (and tried to UNDERSTAND) your entire post. As noted, I've read the the entire thread, 'cuz I've been doing C&R rope since 1946. I've learned a lot in the ensuing years, and, I'm always eager to learn more. (WHEN YOU'RE 'THROUGH LEARNING', YOU'RE THROUGH!
Message: Posted by: M. Tesla (May 20, 2016 05:52AM)
As mentioned, George Sands' Sandsational Rope Routine is great...I always used it in my stage act...I knew George in both NJ and Phoenix, in fact, he personally taught me the routine...he and I both mentored the SYM group in Phoenix/Scottsdale...I can't complain, having both George and Ted Collins as teachers...they are missed...:cry:
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (May 20, 2016 07:39AM)
Well, "MT"

You certainly 'traveled' in GOOD COMPANY!

For those who don't know, Corporal TED COLLINS won an award at the 1942 IBM convention for his "PANAMA ROPE TRICK". (It used the "square knot principle.")

George Sands brought a new concept to the C&R rope!
Message: Posted by: Pop Haydn (Jul 14, 2016 03:24PM)
[youtube]P2mcvNWaiiI[/youtube]
Message: Posted by: Ihop (Jul 15, 2016 03:17PM)
Pop,
I watched a few of your performance videos.
Wow!
You are now my favorite magician. You bumped Bill Malone into second place.
Message: Posted by: Bairefoot (Oct 6, 2016 06:27PM)
For my stand up comedy magic act I have been working on the cut and restored microphone cable. The audience likes it. Just make sure you tell the owner and DJ's what you are doing or they might have an heart attack.


Bairefoot
Message: Posted by: lynnef (Mar 27, 2017 08:55PM)
After watching Pop, apparently today's audiences still appreciate the magic of pixie dust! ps I've learned a lot reading this whole topic. It really makes me appreciate the Café! Lynn
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Mar 28, 2017 09:37AM)
Well...my last woofle just ran away and joined the circus, so, I guess I'll need to call Pop and, find out where he gets his pixie dust!

Glad to hear that you found some useful information in these FOUR pages!!!

My late friend, Dennis Loomis, holds the "record" for a single rope purchase at Abbott's! (I'm not far behind!) I mentioned above in this thread, how we developed a C&R rope, and Nightmare routine back in the early '70s. We used about 7' of rope per show. When one is doing an average of 350+ shows per school year, that's a "whole bunch" of rope!

Next to a deck of cards (and, maybe a few coins) a "hunk" of rope is IMO, one of the most versatile "props"!

--Restoration, penetration, production, vanish, transformation, transposition, "levitation" (Indian rope trick) and, even "juggling" (knot stuff and, my YOYO! +, rope tricks/routines, generally meet all of my criteria: visual effect(s) visible prop, versatile effect(s), angle proof, recognizable prop, little or no set up, no table needed, spot adaptable, packs small and light, and, windproof!

My friend & mentor, the late Roy Mayer, used the late Joe Ovette's "Repeat Knots" in his school show, as his second trick, one season. In a military boarding
school (naval curriculum, not army) he got a STANDING OVATION from the high school kids, on his SECOND TRICK! Roy told me, that he really had to "hustle" to get the show "started" again!!!

The late Milbourne Christopher, toured with a short act of rope tricks in the '40s, and was very successful!
Message: Posted by: Bill Hegbli (Mar 28, 2017 02:50PM)
Don't forget rope can be used for escapes as well, the Keller Rope Tie comes to mind. I think Harry Blackstone made a feature of it in his big stage shows, both Senior and Junior. There is even a little booklet, 33 Rope Ties and Chain Releases.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Mar 28, 2017 04:02PM)
Hi Bill!

Right! Thanks for reminding! I was typing in a hurry, and forgot to include "escapes".

When I was 13, and saw Harry Blackstone Sr's. show in Milwaukee, the Kellar Tie really "grabbed" me! Shortly after, I ordered Percy Abbott's "version" ("Wrist Tie Supreme" --$1.00)

I used it very successfully through my teen years. Even today, the long rope for the Professor's Nightmare is "standing by" for the wrist tie!. Occasionally, on the road, the assembly bureau would book a family "evening show". I could easily pad out the 45 minute assembly program, to 60 minutes. --The wrist tie, Dante's "Lazy Magician" which needed the Professor's Nightmare "long" rope, the two "silks" from the vanishing square knot, an extra long rope, and the 2 silks that were used for the Sympathetic Silks, plus the Lyle's Paper Hat, and/or the Card in Balloon, easily filled the time. (My "version" needed only a deck of cards, 3 balloons, and the George McAthy Insurance Policy.

I saw Harry's show on his final tour in '45. I had a front row, aisle seat. I "volunteered" for the "committee". Standing next to that tired old man, when he stole the man's watch, I got a good lesson in showmanship!!! That was the weekend that I met Nick Ruggiero, and, Dick Berry. They were assistants that year.
Message: Posted by: Rainboguy (Mar 29, 2017 05:18AM)
A couple of (three, actually) thoughts here regarding Rope Magic:

(1) In my opinion, every serious magician should own a copy of Abbott's Encyclopedia of Rope Magic....there is a wealth of wonderful, practical information about the art of performing rope magic there that will last you a lifetime! Besides, rope is the "nearly perfect" Magic prop!

(2) In addition to the above, I suggest finding everything you can written on rope Magic by George Sands.....

(3) It's a rarity to show my friend Dick Oslund anything he hasn't seen before in Magic...especially Rope Magic! But when I showed him the late Gene DeVoe's version of Cut and Restored Rope...he liked it....A LOT! Basically, DeVoe's Cut and restored rope starts out in the "standard" rope cut, and ends with Gene's "knot through neck" bit, where you display the knot in the middle of the rope, put the rope behind your head, moving it back and forth, and ending "spitting out" the knot....It's a Keeper!
Message: Posted by: Dave the Knave (Jun 7, 2017 01:09PM)
[i]I don't know if this knot has been mentioned...[/i]

Way back, maybe 25 or 30 years ago, I bought something called "Magic Works Top Knot" by Jesse Judge. It's not a routine, but it's an effect you can use in your routine. If you want, you can slide the knot on the rope. Then by grasping the cut ends the knot can be tugged on by the spectator and magician, and the knot seems to tighten on the rope. And then the magician pops the knot off the rope by pulling on the one cut end that allows that to happen. You can toss the knot out for inspection if you like.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Jun 12, 2017 10:45AM)
That sounds interesting! I'll PM you as soon as I can find a free minute, to discuss it.
Message: Posted by: furmanmatt (Jul 4, 2017 08:56AM)
Been using this routine for stage and close up professionally for years. Always a crowd pleaser-

https://youtu.be/1kVA4XgFNP8?t=2m36s
Message: Posted by: TrickyRicky (Oct 23, 2018 05:53AM)
Eric Lewis rope routine is probably the best one on the market. On page four there is a bit there when he showed the move he used to place the middle of the rope on his thumb to Edward Victor he said "but you will really cut the rope in the middle".
Eric's routine is quite entertaining and have some moves that you won't find in any other routines out there.
Tricky Ricky
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Nov 22, 2018 03:34PM)
Some of you may have noticed that I quit writing much after the inventor of the Matrix coin routine came on.

I have no desire in crossing swords with him. That would be a waste of my time!

The EFFECT IS ALWAYS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE METHOD!

I toured the USA, coast to coast, and, border to border, and, was never "at liberty", in about 50 years! Managers would call me to learn when I had open time.

I simply ignore him.
Message: Posted by: countrymaven (Dec 19, 2018 01:01AM)
I believe Pavel has great material for ropes on his DVD's. If you are creative and could combine some of his
genius with some parts of other routines, you would have a winner on your hands. For the cut and restored rope. This is what
I am doing. But yes, Mr. Oslund, you are correct, it is not the method but the presentation that will impress your audience.
Message: Posted by: imgic (Dec 19, 2018 10:53PM)
Countrymaven gives great advice...learn routine from the greats, but be creative, combine with other routines, blend with your personality, and the go try it out, and revise. Soon you’ll have a routine unique to you, and will be entertaining.
Message: Posted by: Dick Oslund (Dec 22, 2018 05:15PM)
Thanks for the compliment Countrymaven. Re, the point about the Effect is more important than the METHOD. I've been "preaching" that for eons. I'm glad that one more has understood it.

Now about PAVEL. He had a good inventive mind, BUT, he never had an ACT! I saw him on the Ed Sullivan Show EONS ago. He had five boxes, each had a letter of his name. He walked from box to box, pulled out a prop, and performed a trick with it. I have a fairly good memory, but, I can't remember if he even did a ROPE TRICK!

A few years later, he was booked at Abbott's. Karrell Fox was MC. We were discussing the evening show. We both roomed at Jerry Conklin's. He said, "Pavel is on the bill, and, I have a problem. Where do I put him? He has no act!"

We talked some more about the need for the show to "build". Then Karrell's face "lit up". He said, "I'll put him between two strong acts, and, HOPE that he doesn't slow the show down." (It's OK to STOP THE SH0W! but, DON'T SLOW IT DOWN!!!)

Fortunately, Karrell's plan worked. He had uncanny 'show sense"!!!
Message: Posted by: countrymaven (Dec 22, 2018 10:20PM)
Wow Dick, Merry Christmas, yes I am finally learning the presentation can make a simple effect a miracle.
Fascinating to hear about Pavel. The same is true of some of the greats in magic. Some of the most creative
magicians are not good at or can hardly make a living performing. They are gifted and compelled to create.

So it seems maybe Pavel did not know perhaps his great strength was his rope inventions?

Thanks Imgic, for example, I plan on a cut and restored rope, conventional, then using a gimmicked rope a la Pavel, then a clean rope switch.
Also thining of doing something like Mac King does with many pieces but trying to do it more openly ....
Message: Posted by: imgic (Dec 27, 2018 11:27PM)
CountryMaven, would love to see your routine someday, sounds great.

I love Mac King’s routine, along with Pop Haydn’s Mongolian Pop Kmot routine, there are a lot of great entertaining. C&R ropes routines...even for today’s audience
Message: Posted by: Nem (Apr 13, 2019 10:54AM)
I still get a lot of mileage out of the classic sliding knot.
Message: Posted by: thomasR (Apr 22, 2019 06:43PM)
Pop Haydn's is fantastic if you want to be on stage solo (which I do). But if you are looking for a cut and restored rope trick with an assistant on stage in a "do as I do" type of setting, check out Mac King's cut and restored rope routine. He teaches it on his penguin lecture.